Conspiracy: Follow the Money

It is, sometimes, just nuts. But also, on occasion, sinister.

This started out as a piece on conspiracy theories - a bit of history, pop psychology and a question: why so many of them? It seems to me that there are many more wackadoodle ideas out there than ever before. But some research led me to unexpected linkages between conspiracy, Silicon Valley money and the New Right. Maybe I have gone down the rabbit hole in asserting those linkages - read on and let me know!

Don't pay heed to temptation
For his hands are so cold
You gotta help me keep the Devil
Way down in the hole

(Tom Waits)

People fall down the conspiracy theory rabbit hole for well-known reasons. The need for group hugs, identity and answers. But why so many fallers, why the multiplication of new conspiracies and why now? A typical, recent, headline from the FT:

How many people fall? One answer surprised me, at least:

It can be easy to mock conspiracy theorists, but here’s a not-so-conspiratorial fact: you’re surrounded by them. Nearly half of Americans believe in at least one conspiracy theory, whether it’s who shot Kennedy, who was behind 9/11 or where Obama was born. 

Tons of research into conspiracy theories tries to answer the basic questions of why, who and which. Why do so many people fall for them, who are they and which conspiracy? Psychologists and other social scientists conclude that generalisations are hard to find and that it often ‘all depends’.

My reading of that literature and personal experience leads me to think that predisposition to believe conspiracies is a thing but general principles are tough to establish - at least from the data that we have. Here is what I think, with a slant that focuses on how our willingness to embrace conspiracy theories is exploited by the ‘broligarchs’ - a new term invented by the brilliant Carole Cadwalladr, aimed at capturing the growing menace of the Uber-billionaires, tech-bros, their useful idiots in universities and their acolytes in corridors of power. Men (almost always) who have made billions from the technology that has destroyed our public square and promoted the growth of the conspiracy theory and are now financing some really weird shit. Technology has more than a walk-on part in this story.

Complexity, technology and fear of the taxman

The collapse of so many computer systems in the wake of the CrowdStrike botched system upgrade was another reminder that the world is a complicated place.

In pre-industrial times, when technology let us down we crafted another wheel or fashioned another spade. Our constant companions were horses and cows: the iPhones of their day. Our four legged friends lasted until they didn’t and we all knew how new ones were made. When the old ones broke down we ate their innards and made clothes out of their hides. 

We all believed in God and his mysterious ways. We occasionally revolted against our masters when the exploitation and abuse went too far. Mostly we rubbed along in serfdom and priest-ridden cultures. We knew our place and didn’t ask too many questions - because the only questions we wanted to ask had all been answered: ‘thy will be done’. Existential angst was yet to be invented.

There was only one conspiracy theory: religion. That explained everything. All the big questions were answered. More or less anyway. The question, ‘what is the meaning of life?’ was as redundant as it was unasked. Such a question was an out of reach luxury. When you are stuck at the bottom of Maslow’s hierarchy, the struggle for enough calories leaves no room for self-indulgent introspection. 

Religion provided all the human connection and group identity that was needed. Costumes, cross-dressing, collective singing and synchronised bobbing up and down. Basic training in group and multiple sub-group identities provided from an early age. First lesson: wear a silly hat. Second: oppress women. That second lesson has a general applicability: when you find your tribe, learn how to hate the other. 

Technological progress and the demise of religion have caused a spot of bother. In just a couple of short centuries, technology has taught us that the universe wasn’t created in seven days by an old, stale, pale, white guy with a beard.  Rather, we all came into existence as the result of a sort of quantum fart. 

Science teaches that God probably doesn’t exist. We have more plausible, evidence-based, ideas about the universe. But science has outpaced human evolution. We are still wired to demand all that connection and group identity; we still need to have an explanation for everything. Particularly now that God is working on a less ambitious project. 

The demise of the God conspiracy has driven the creation of an infinite number of substitute delusions. Just as maths can reveal the existence of the multiverse, anti-science, bat-shit craziness reveals an equal and opposite number of explanations of the human condition. The shrinking numbers of those who still do God - church going is an exception, even in America - choose to buttress their delusions from a menu of ever bizarre choices. When evangelical Christians combine with Q-Anon, be very suspicious: somebody is after your soul, your money and your vote.

Lots of members of the New Right lament God’s demise. A strangely large number of them are ultra-conservative Catholics. They don’t blame science or logic for God’s disappearance. Rather, it’s all the fault of small-l liberals. This, for the reasons I have explained, is an error. Perhaps a category error. Technology is responsible for the decline of the religion conspiracy. It’s ironic how heavy is the use of technology to try and spread ideas that seek to resurrect God.

The prevalence of evidence-free belief is reasonably well understood. There is a lot of comfort in proclaiming access to the big secrets; power and status flow to those with superior knowledge. Anxiety is calmed, the control freaks are sated.

We cannot cope with chaos or entropy. We utterly reject the idea that nobody is in charge, there is no purpose or point. There has to be somebody running things doesn’t there? If isn’t God then it must be the Rothschild’s. Possibly both - logic is always noticeable by its absence.

Conspiracies and the new conservatism

Wealth, income and intelligence do not confer immunity: anyone can fall down the hole. But powerful people realise the advantages that flow from appearing to fall. Then, you can become the leader of the fallen. But first you have to profess evangelical belief, proselytise and be seen as more bat-shit crazy than anyone else. That’s the way you stand out and become the chosen one. 

Maybe that’s too cynical - smart, rich Senators, Prime Ministers, Professors, Judges and Editors might actually believe everything they say. But I doubt it very much. What is the belief system of the ultra-billionaires bankrolling people like J D Vance? Elon Musk with his millions for Trump? There is a long list of old and new money types declaring for Trump.

Here’s my (conspiracy?) theory: the gap between the billionaires and the rest of us has grown so wide that even some of the Uber-rich realise that they have gone too far.

Like all rich people (even mere millionaires) everywhere, billionaires spend most of their time growing ever more paranoid: who is going to take my money from me? The thought that you might go from $10 billion to $9 billion eventually drives you mad. The bigger the pile, the deeper the paranoia.

So secure bunkers are built to protect their money from thieves; relationships are shattered to make sure family or friends never come near the cash; political systems are rigged to guarantee no finance minister ever comes after the extensive tax breaks (Google ‘Carried Interest’). Otherwise harmless University Professors are wheeled out of their institutionalised existence, to which they are normally confined, to support the New World Order.

The system had to be rigged to get them their billions in the first place. Now, it has to be rigged even further to make sure nobody separates them from even a fraction of their billions. Such is the paranoia, they have decided the time has come to change - break - the system. 

Some of these mega billionaires purport to subscribe to a new political philosophy that argues democracy has failed and the only choice now is to restore a form of monarchy.

It’s hard to identify a single, unifying idea underlying the billionaires’ grabs for even more power and money. There may not be one, other than the inchoate desire for just more. But, for clues, Google someone called Curtis Yarvin.

Yarvin posits the existence of ‘The Cathedral’, something that his Wikipedia entry describes as an amalgam of universities and mainstream media. The Cathedral is populated by a Brahmin class who preach equality and social justice: a system of values that has, apparently, led to chaos and disorder. Yarvin is not the only one pushing this idea - there are plenty of others, often Professors of politics or history at elite universities.

Democracy, on this new view, has failed. Consequently, society needs a ‘hard reboot’. I could go on - read Yarvin (and a host of others) views for yourself. But guess who emerges the winner from society’s reboot?

It seems to me that rather than deliberately destabilising society, Universities have several roles, one of which is to lock up some very smart people - people who, if allowed into the real world, would create havoc. Best keep them in prisons disguised as seats of learning. Sadly, some of these intellectuals manage to escape - or are freed by billionaires. ‘Intellectuals’, whose views wouldn’t normally make it out of the Junior Common Room, are adopted by billionaires in search of fig-leaf theories that will help them keep and make more billions. It could be the script of an episode of Game of Thrones, particularly as the restoration of a kind of monarchy is precisely what some of these new conspiracists are advocating. Guess who is to sit on that new throne?

Steve Bannon, once Trump’s right-hand man, now the self-proclaimed leader of the global ‘MAGA movement’, says that Trump, in certain circles, is now regarded - derided perhaps - as a moderate. Bannon, a Catholic, also argues that Pope Francis isn’t Catholic enough (it’s an immigration thing mostly).

Another Catholic, J D Vance, is in the running to be Vice President of the US. Vance is as good as any any example of the way on which the disparate (and often contradictory threads) that link the New Right with the belief that Democracy has failed. The deployment of conspiracy theories is a large part of the armoury but far from the only weapon used. Politico puts it well:

{the New Right consists of] people who push for post-liberal regime change, some who pine for the cultural conservatism of Viktor Orbán’s Hungary, and one outright monarchist. This cohort espouses a variety of sometimes competing viewpoints, but they are bound together by the belief that the liberal project of “progress” — especially in the form of economic liberalization, technological advancement and the leveling of social hierarchies — has in fact been a mistake.

Vance credits many different influencers of his journey from Trump-denier to ultra-MAGA conservatism. One is University Professor Patrick Deneen, a conservative catholic. In a podcast with the New York Times’ Ezra Klein, this was said:

conservatives need to reject liberal values like free speech, religious liberty and pluralism, abandon their defensive posturing and use the power of the state to actively fight back against what he calls “liberal totalitarianism.”

Politico puts it this way:

Vance has publicly cited Deneen as a major intellectual influence and even appeared on a panel with him at the book launch for Regime Change, hosted at Catholic University in 2023. At the event, Vance identified himself as member of the “post-liberal right” and said he views his role in Congress as “explicitly anti-regime,” channeling Deneen’s critic of liberal progressivism.

In a statement after Vance’s selection, Deneen praised him as “a man of deep personal faith and integrity, a devoted family man, a generous friend, and a genuine patriot.”

There are lots of ways members of the New Right use conspiracy theories to push their agenda. The theories can be full-frontal or subtle. Sometimes they are old-fashioned dog whistles.

Everything J D Vance has said in recent years has come under the microscope - to the point where some are wondering whether Trump has made a big mistake. All that vile catwomen stuff. Here’s Propublica quoting something else that they say Vance said:

“If you listen to Rachel Maddow every night, the basic worldview that you have is that MAGA grandmas who have family dinners on Sunday and bake apple pies for their family are about to start a violent insurrection against this country,” Vance said. “But if you listen to Alex Jones every day, you would believe that a transnational financial elite controls things in our country, that they hate our society, and oh, by the way, a lot of them are probably sex perverts too.”

Vance went on, “Sorry, ladies and gentlemen, that’s actually a hell of a lot more true than Rachel Maddow’s view of society.”

He said that every person in attendance for his speech believed “something that’s a little crazy.” In his case, he said, “I believe the devil is real and that he works terrible things in our society. That’s a crazy conspiracy theory to a lot of very well-educated people in this country right now.”

Conspiracy theories have an existence independent of the broligarchs and their brothers-in-arms, wannabe Presidents. But the connections between religious and political conservatism are in plain sight. As are the the links to conspiracy theories - they are just so useful. The New Right that wants to protect its money and ‘Reboot the system’. They find it all too easy to exploit our anxieties and need to belong. Even if belonging means joining a cult.

As ever, Anne Applebaum puts it well, arguing that today’s bad guys are different to those in the past:

…nowadays, autocracies are run not by one bad guy but by sophisticated networks relying on kleptocratic financial structures, a complex of security services and technological experts who provide surveillance, propaganda, and disinformation…this group operates not like a bloc but rather like an agglomeration of companies not bound by ideology but rather by a ruthless, single-minded determination to preserve their personal wealth and power

The author of the article mentioned at the top of this piece asks ‘what can we do to stop the collective warping of reality…?’ Sadly, the answer is not exactly forthcoming. Probably because there are no easy answers. This is how that FT article on conspiracy theories concludes:

Ultimately, we may have to take responsibility for checking our own sources. “We need to be better in our own information diet,” says [an expert]. “We need to stop waiting for social media companies to be the solution. We need to be the solution.

That may seem somewhat feeble but it is probably right. The onus is on all of us to stand up and fight. And not change the subject when someone we know starts spouting fact-free garbage. Flabby centrists need to stand up and be counted.